lmi
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lmi] Question about using fardels


From: Greg Chicares
Subject: Re: [lmi] Question about using fardels
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 23:26:55 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0

On 2020-09-24 18:29, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:45:24 +0000 Greg Chicares <gchicares@sbcglobal.net> 
> wrote:
> 
> GC> On 2020-09-22 16:40, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:

[...three required files missing from fardel?...]

> GC> wrap_fardel:
> GC>   @$(INSTALL) -m 0664 $(datadir)/configurable_settings.xml .
> GC>   @$(INSTALL) -m 0664 $(datadir)/company_logo.png .
> GC>   @$(INSTALL) -m 0664 $(datadir)/group_quote_banner.png .
> GC> 
> GC> I believe 'make install', which is a prerequisite of 'fardel',
> GC> should have installed those three files to $datadir. Any idea
> GC> where this went wrong?
> 
>  Sorry, it went wrong in my recollection/transcription of what happened.
> The actual problem was that these files don't exist if you just run "make
> fardel", without running the full install_msw.sh. I'm not sure if it's
> really a problem for you, but I find it slightly illogical that making a
> fardel, which, after all, provides another way of installing lmi, requires
> having already run the installation script.

I guess the usual autotools idiom is
  ./configure
  make && make install
For lmi, it could be seen as
  ./install_msw.sh
  make install
Of course, 'install_msw.sh' isn't much like 'configure',
but both ways have an initial prerequisite step.

In an autotools world, where would the code that sets up these
prerequisite files reside? Perhaps we can figure out a parallel
lmi locus and move (or at least duplicate) that code there.

>  BTW, I'm thinking of making the automated CI builds on GitHub produce
> fardel as their "artefact" on output. This would be convenient for me, but
> perhaps it could be useful to have fardels automatically built for each new
> commit for you as well?

We distribute only binaries generated on equipment controlled
by Corporate IT, which provides some kind of guarantees that
are seen as important. But maybe binaries built on a site
controlled by ms would be acceptable to the overseers, though
facsimiles of Soviet postage stamps could make them worry
about Яussian h4X0rs.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]